They ( Crestor) are trying to kill me again. Also you.

6

Makers of Crestor now claim that people with normal cholesterol are also at risk for heart attack. Their study shows that if this group has a high level of hsCRP they lower their risk for heart attacks and arterial disease.

This even though hsCRP indicates generalized inflammation not just arterial and heart. Of course they didnt address the negative side effects of lowering your cholesterol below normal levels. Dr. Nissan of the Cleveland Clinic admits they will now get to treat a lot more people (Oh boy!).

One CNBC host asked no joke why statins are not put in the water supply. The response: That would be a Communist plot just like fluoride. Yep they keep on trying to kill us but well tje question will they. The other answer that you might have missed it that statins are all ready in the water in fact. Then the reply is That would be a Communist plot just like fluoride.

Crestor has been a known killer for a long time. Anybody in health care has known this. A while back, it was known to be a very dangerous drug. Now, all of the sudden, it is a wonder drug. Hmm…strange, don’t you think?

……….I found out, quickly, that the “cholesterol hysteria” was a scam. The situation had been fabricated. In fact, the research showed that there was no relationship between these two foodstuffs and heart disease at all. At that time (1980), the nation was still several years away from the massive public information campaigns sponsored by the American Heart Association; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. These institutions promoted the National Cholesterol Education Program. The focus of this program was to convince Americans about the risks they faced by consuming fat and cholesterol. ………. Eventually, the idea attained the powerful hold that it has today upon the consciousness of everyone, everywhere. The era implicating dietary fat and dietary and blood cholesterol as the causes of heart disease began in 1950. It was then that we saw the development of a method to measure blood levels of lipids. This started it all off. The developer of this technique proposed that the levels of certain blood lipids (fats) were influenced and determined by the amount and kind of fat in the diet. This, then, was the origin of the dietheart hypothesis. Soon afterwards, Dr. Ancel Keys and the American Heart Association adopted the idea. Keys published a seminal paper entitled the Seven Countries Study. In 1953, Keys, of the University of Minnesota, kick-started the dietheart hypothesis. He propelled it into the national limelight. In his study, Keys plotted the intake of fat for seven countries. He showed the relation between fat intake and deaths from heart disease in seven countries. The slope of the line seemed compelling. It demonstrated the highest number of deaths from heart disease in those countries whose citizens’ dietary fat intake was a large proportion ofI found out, quickly, that the “cholesterol hysteria” was a scam. The situation had been fabricated. In fact, the research showed that there was no relationship between these two foodstuffs and heart disease at all. At that time (1980), the nation was still several years away from the massive public information campaigns sponsored by the American Heart Association; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. These institutions promoted the National Cholesterol Education Program. The focus of this program was to convince Americans about the risks they faced by consuming fat and cholesterol. ………. The data arising from this authoritative study showed absolutely no relation between the dietary intake of either fat or cholesterol with heart disease. It also showed no relationship between blood levels of cholesterol and heart disease. Those data were never properly published. This is because the findings conflicted with the positions held by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the American Heart Association. These institutions, apparently, wanted to avoid any limitations or reductions in fund-raising. They needed the cash to support executive salaries. They desired wealth accumulation. The diet-heart hypothesis proved to be a generous funding source for its supporters. Since the inception of the diet-heart hypothesis, 33 international clinical trials have been completed. These trials studied the effect of diet and/or drugs on blood cholesterol and rates of heart disease. Mann tells us, “It is usual for collaborative investigators to continue drawing on Federal funds for ‘follow-up.’ A collaborator thus has a key to the U. S. Treasury so long as the diet-heart hypothesis can be kept afloat.” Periodically, the institutional leaders organize “consensus conferences.” The conference’s purpose is to support their position. The institution only invites supporters of the diet-heart hypothesis; dissenters stay home. Dr. Michael Oliver, a physician involved in the diet-heart hypothesis from its early days, has tagged these conferences “consensus nonsensus.” ………. Printed on the cover of his book, The Cholesterol Conspiracy is a quotation from Dr. George Mann. Mann states, “Saturated fat and cholesterol in the diet are not the cause of coronary heart disease. That myth is the greatest scientific deception of the century, perhaps of any century.” Smith goes on to describe the underlying treachery involved in the promotion of “the big lie.” He describes how the cholesterol juggernaut rolled over the world’s population. This rolling-over is supported by government agencies and the American Heart Association. These institutions are, with mostly manufactured evidence, forcing drastic changes in dietary habits. Smith describes, in detail, the misinterpretations, the misrepresentations, and the mistakes made by the pro-cholesterol forces. The central achievement of his book was to unearth and describe what the public hasn’t been told about cholesterol and fat. ………. As the cholesterol theory of heart disease gained momentum, doctors took it upon themselves to announce a new blood cholesterol value, a value they deemed safe, a value derived from their phony research. They arbitrarily lowered the safe blood level of cholesterol to a number that was lower than one that was “biologically defensible.” They established the “new” safe level as 200 mg/dL. By doing so, they assured that more than 50% of the population would be classified as having high cholesterol. When dietary or non-pharmaceutical attempts to lower cholesterol to the “new” safe zone fail (as they always will), they recommend the use of expensive, Establishment-enriching drugs. That’s the only choice left. The expectations are that one-third of the American population will have to make regular physician visits and use drugs to meet these artificially established guidelines. This enriches physicians as well as the food and pharmaceutical industries. ………. And so on.

it is well established that trigliceryde and ldl elevated levels are strongly associated causally with heart disease. What is a crock of bs is that dietary cholesterol causes these elevated levels. Almost as important if not more so is maintaining a good supply of HDL's, which is underrated, and I will agree the overall number for cholesterol is stupid, it should be split into it's components at all times and reported that way.

There are ways to improve cholesterol non medically. Exercise, drink wine rich in tannins, eat fish. There is a reason the french and the japanese are the most long-lived.

The real shame of these studies is not the drug thing, but the fact that so many food companies and the dietary recommendations are devoid of fat. Most fats are good, and are more filling. Sugar has replaced fat in the diet, which in the end actually does raise cholesterol and cause heart disease and hypertension through diabetes and thyroid/kidney/heart/hormone interactions.

I have been looking for a reasonable investment in the pharmacy/medical area, but I just can't seem to shake the nagging feeling that something is wrong, very wrong with that industry sector. I have a sneaking suspicion that this is the tip of the iceberg. The one-hand-washes-the-other relationship of the medical industry and the governmental regulating agencies leads to dubious 'scientific' conclusions.

Thanks for the excellent blog lquadland10. Your hard work is very much appreciated.